The nice thing about having a Democrat in the White House is that there is never any bad news...

...until they wake up to "sudden" and "unexpected" news.

NBC's Brian Williams suddenly notices that Obama's crowds in 2012 are 10% of what they were in 2008.

Our news media - the best "lagging indicator" that a Politburo could ever hope for.

Who says that the mainstream media won't do its job.

The MSM is finally vetting Mitt Romneys FATHER's eligibility for office, for his 1974 run against Richard Nixon.

The only thing left to be amazed about the mainstream media is the fact that I can still be amazed.

Liberal Fizbin - Asking Obama about the effect of 20 years of exposure to an anti-American, anti-Semitic church - Wrong, Bad and Racist...

...Linking Romney to a Mormon massacre that happened in the 19th Century - Totally Kosher.

WaPo attacks Romney for Mountain Meadows Massacre:

Reporting from Carrollton, Arkansas, the Washington Post finds some locals still upset with actions of a "Mormon militia" over 150 years ago. The Post reports:

On Sept. 11, 1857, a wagon train from this part of Arkansas met with a gruesome fate in Utah, where most of the travelers were slaughtered by a Mormon militia in an episode known as the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Hundreds of the victims’ descendants still populate these hills and commemorate the killings, which they have come to call “the first 9/11.”

Many of the locals grew up hearing denunciations of Mormonism from the pulpit on Sundays, and tales of the massacre from older relatives who considered Mormons “evil.”

But the main concern of the paper is ... will this hurt Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney?

The article, headlined "Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith tangles with a quirk of Arkansas history," attacks Romney for being a Mormon, because, according to the paper, his coreligionists and ancestors were responsible for "the first 9/11."

Several questions:

1. How obviously lame and stupid.

2. Is this the year that the mainstream media finally loses all credibility?

3. "...which they have come to call 'the first 9/11.'"???????

I call utter bullshit on that. Who are "they"?

Seriously, who are these Arkansans who huddle around their lodges and re-live an event that happened 150 years ago and hundreds of miles away?

4. I repeat, is this the year that the mainstream media finally loses all credibility?

Why does Obama need to raise money...

...he's got the media working for him.

The Washington Post is pushing the envelope on defamation, even though Romney is a public figure:

One of the “witnesses” used in the Washington Post hit piece seems to have thrown a wrench in the narrative. Stu White, a Romney friend, has this to say:

White was not present for the prank, in which Romney is said to have forcefully cut a student’s long hair and was not aware of it until this year when he was contacted by the Washington Post.

Read that again.

Stu White was not present for the prank and wasn’t even aware of it until the Washington Post contacted him THIS YEAR about it.

No big deal, you say? Well it is a big deal because this is what the Washington Post said as it relates to Stu White:

“I always enjoyed his pranks,” said Stu White, a popular friend of Romney’s who went on to a career as a public school teacher and has long been bothered by the Lauber incident. “But I was not the brunt of any of his pranks.”

Emphasis mine. The Lauber incident is the one where Romney cut Lauber’s hair.

Now, how was Stu White long “bothered” by an incident in 1965 that he didn’t know of until 2012? Hmm?

Someone has some explaining to do.

The reaction comes from an ABC article that is framed in a weirdly passive-aggressive way; essentially making the story about how the Romney campaign is going into a full defense mode in trying to enlist Stu White and his former friends into defending Romney, rather than, you know, going with the real story that a media outlet just committed actionable defamation by knowingly printing libel!

Not a day goes by when I'm not amazed by the partisan dishonesty of the mainstream media, and then I'm more amazed by the fact that I can be amazed.

Asking again, is 2012 the year where the liberal media jumps the shark?

It's getting pretty bad when a person in denial about media bias begins to suspect that there is media bias:

The unchanged tape is a thousand miles distant from the mangled one, and NBC has said it is sorry for "an error made in the production process." But that is evasive mumbo jumbo. The editing was not a technical issue of production. It was a substantive issue of content, and the "error" happened to fit a thesis of racist homicide while making the network look like a watchdog hero. It seems to me to have been error with a purpose.

Sadly, very, very sadly, this NBC incident is one of many possible examples of an outlandish, rules-be-damned rush to judgment in which reporters and commentators are playing the roles of crazed prosecutor, judge and jury not about to wait for evidence.

According to a news report on findings by the PEW Research Center, news outlets have been paying more attention to this story than any other. For a stretch, the MSNBC cable network spent half its time on it, and one of MSNBC's hosts, longtime racial agitator Al Sharpton, has been leading protests. ABC embarrassed itself somewhat less than NBC when it claimed that a video of Zimmerman showed no signs he had been attacked by Martin. The issue matters because the reason police did not arrest Zimmerman was their believe he was defending himself. ABC was wrong about the video. It checked with forensic experts and changed its story.

Some of the bad journalism has been slightly more subtle, such as the frequent juxtaposition of a photo of an unshaven Zimmerman in a jail uniform next to a photo of Martin as an angelic looking kid. But there has also been journalism of the kind that produced an eyewitness who says he saw 6-foot-2 Martin on top of Zimmerman and that revealed how Martin had been expelled from school three times and was once found in possession of jewelry that was not his. Zimmerman, we have learned, is himself a minority -- his mother is Hispanic -- and has white as well as black family members. Black friends have spoken up for him and he has mentored a black child, although he also has some rough spots in his past.

What happened is a terrible tragedy, and it is understandable that many would react emotionally. But many have also seen journalistic unfairness in all of this. Jack Pitney, a professor at Claremont McKenna College, recently told the Christian Science Monitor that the story "undermines public confidence in mainstream news media, which is already pretty low." He noted PEW already says 77 percent of Americans think the press is generally unfair.

News is in a stage of dramatic transition. Newspapers and broadcast networks are in decline as new media -- cable TV, blogs and more -- are making themselves felt in ways both scary and encouraging. No one knows where it will end. This much we can bet on: If mature media forsake reasonable standards, it will end badly.

The tipping point cometh.

NBC has fired the person who edited the Zimmerman tape for making a mistake:

NBC News has fired a producer who was involved in the production of a misleading segment about the Trayvon Martin case in Florida.

The person was fired on Thursday, according to two people with direct knowledge of the disciplinary action who declined to be identified discussing internal company matters. They also declined to name the fired producer. A spokeswoman for NBC News declined to comment.

The action came in the wake of an internal investigation by NBC News into the production of the segment, which strung together audio clips in such a way that made George Zimmerman’s shooting of Mr. Martin sound racially motivated. Ever since the Feb. 26 shooting, there has been a continuing debate about whether race was a factor in the incident.

The segment in question was shown on the “Today” show on March 27. It included audio of Mr. Zimmerman saying, “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”

But Mr. Zimmerman’s comments had been taken grossly out of context by NBC. On the phone with a 911 dispatcher, he actually said of Mr. Martin, “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.” Then the dispatcher asked, “O.K., and this guy — is he white, black or Hispanic?” Only then did Mr. Zimmerman say, “He looks black.”

The editing of the segment was initially noticed by NewsBusters, an arm of the Media Research Center, a conservative media monitoring group. On March 31, NBC told The Washington Post that it would investigate.

Inside NBC, there was shock that the segment had been broadcast. Citing an anonymous network executive, Reuters reported that “the ‘Today’ show’s editorial control policies — which include a script editor, senior producer oversight and in most cases legal and standards department reviews of material to be broadcast — missed the selective editing of the call.”

On April 4, the network news division said in a statement that it deeply regretted the “error made in the production process.”

“We will be taking the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future and apologize to our viewers,” the network said.

It did not specify what steps it would take. But one day later it dismissed a Miami-based producer who had worked at NBC for several years.

The people with direct knowledge of the firing characterized the misleading edit as a mistake, not a purposeful act.

So, how come this isn't the story? Why don't we get details on how such a mistake could be made?

Jim Treacher observes:

I wonder how tough it is to find out the names of all the NBC News producers who were fired on April 5, 2012? Pretty tough, probably. Good job keeping a lid on this, NBC.

And these anonymous sources are actually sticking with the whoopsie defense. It was an accident. “D’oh! I seem to have edited out the three seconds of your conversation that make it clear you’re responding to a police dispatcher’s question, rather than volunteering a racist motive. Silly me!” Well, if it was an accident, why was this unnamed person fired? If it was an accident, what’s the thinking behind this clumsy attempt at a cover-up that makes people skeptical that it was an accident?

MSNBC went to battle stations when James O’Keefe committed a misdemeanor. They called it “Watergate Jr.” But when one of their own manufactures evidence in a racially charged shooting that’s become a nationwide scandal? Crickets. Guess they don’t want to step on Al Sharpton’s toes.

Nothing to see here, America. Let it be known that NBC News won’t smear you and then close ranks to cover up their wrongdoing. Unless it’ll help their ratings.